In next generation optical modems (e.g., 100 Gb/s and beyond), and in particular in transmitters, there is a requirement for greater optical performance (via better control of optical modulators) and for allowing a wider choice of vendors/technologies (i.e. different lithium niobate (LiNbO3) modulator vendors or indium phosphide (InP) photonic integration technologies). In particular, the new InP technology is prized for its small size and anticipated lower cost (and consequently is proposed to be used in next gen small-form-factor pluggable optics). One of the most important functions of transmitter control is to bias a modulator so it transmits a distortion free and correct optical data constellation via selecting the correct “bias points” (optical phase points). Conventionally, lithium niobate modulators have been used which have a large (optical) phase adjustment range and therefore, flexible modulator bias points. By flexible modulator bias points, this means that there is more than one set of bias points available with about the same optical performance. Using lithium niobate modulators, a generalized search can be implemented to find “reasonable” bias points, but these are not necessarily optimum points. That is, there is little performance degradation when operating at non-optimum bias points. InP technology has a relatively small phase adjustment range and thus, if a poor hardware scheme and algorithm for bias point selection is used, the correct constellation cannot be generated or unnecessary cost is added due to rejected modulators. Also, InP modulators have twice the phase controls, so for each modulator polarization, the search space is much larger: 6-dimensional vs. 3-dimensional (for LiNbO3). In addition, because of InP physics, it is necessary to find the minimum phase bias points to get best cost and performance.